Christianity And Political Participation

Christianity
has traditionally been viewed as an “other-worldly” religion, one more
concerned with the hereafter than with the here-and-now. In the New Testament,
Christ, in his trial before Pilate, is quoted as saying “My kingdom is not of
this world”. And in many of the parables and apostolic teachings, emphasis is
laid on spiritual rather than material treasures. It would therefore seem that
Christianity sets its sights on the afterlife, treating life in this world as
transient and full of trials and tribulations.

However,
there are other passages in the New Testament in which Christians are exhorted
to defer to duly constituted authority which has its ultimate sanction in God
Himself. Christ’s famous dictum “Render to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God
what is God’s” is often cited in this regard. A balanced view of Christian
tradition will reveal that it takes this world seriously, no less than the
world to come. If, indeed, the present life is a preparation for eternal life,
it follows that it cannot be taken lightly and casually. It has to be lived
fully and conscientiously. It means that individually and collectively, life
must be lived according to sound moral and spiritual principles. For the
Christian, therefore, social and political organization must reflect the values
of the Gospel.

In
the Biblical world-view, as reflected in the book of Genesis, Man is created in
God’s own image and likeness and has been entrusted with the stewardship of
creation. He must love God with all his heart and soul and strength and his
fellow humans as himself. He must render an account of his life to his Creator.
This is serious business and therefore Christianity expects social and
political institutions and arrangements to facilitate this mission in every
way. Christianity does not advocate any particular political system or give a
blueprint for a specific form of social organization. It only lays down certain
broad principles which it believes to be fundamental to any civilized society.
The details are to be worked out in each social context according to the
circumstances of time and place, using pragmatism and creativity no less than
idealism.

The
premise that man is created in the image of the divine is the basis of his
inalienable dignity. His fundamental rights are rooted in his very nature as a
human being, capable of rationality, self-determination and solidarity with his
co-humans. The United Nations Charter, like many political constitutions,
acknowledges this basic tenet, albeit in a secular, non-denominational manner.
It is another matter that there is often a yawning gap between precept and
practice. Many variants of the modern political ideologies of liberalism and socialism trace their origins,
directly or indirectly, to the biblical concept of man being created in God’s image and likeness.
The political slogan of “
Liberty,
Equality and Fraternity” is an off-shoot of that world-view.

From
high-sounding philosophy to the nitty-gritty of day-to-day political life is a
far cry. But we cannot afford to be skeptical as the stakes are too high for
adopting a merely Machiavellian approach to participation in politics. For a
Christian, the logic of participation in political life is simple. He could
reason as follows: God has created me as a unique individual, but not placed me
in a vacuum. He has placed me in a society which is itself constituted by many
other unique individuals like myself. So, we all belong together and need one
another so as to grow to our full potential. Hence society needs a harmonious
structure and a pattern of authority that promotes the common good even while
upholding the dignity and rights of each individual. Politics is nothing but
the exercise of that authority and is therefore essential and inherent to the
nature of society. Now, how that authority is to be institutionalized and
actualized is for each society to determine, taking into consideration its
historical setting, peculiar circumstances and legitimate aspirations.

Given
the pluralism that exists in nature as a whole, it is not surprising that
mankind is categorized into a plethora of races, nations and sovereign states.
This by itself should not be a cause of dismay. Indeed it should be an occasion
for celebrating the many-splendored variety of the human family. The problem
arises when conflicts break out within and among states, and human rights
suffer as a result. Indeed the whole thrust of governance should be the
promotion of the security and integral well-being of the entire human community
inhabiting planet earth. Thus Christianity frowns upon war and violence as an
instrument of policy as this violates basic human dignity.

As
for the structure of government, Christianity is silent over what its form
should be. Should there be a parliamentary or presidential or monarchical form
of government? Should the legislature be unicameral or bicameral? Should the
polity be unitary or federal? How should the police, the defence forces and the
civil services be organized? Should the executive be merged with the
legislature or be separate from it? How is judicial independence to be
safeguarded? These and similar questions can be debated ad infinitum and
various formulations arrived at to suit the peculiarities of social evolution.
Christianity is only concerned with the net
result of political action which should be the enhancement of the dignity of
God’s children. It is also insistent that the means, no less than the ends
of social policy should be consistent with human dignity. Thus, legislative
enactments, executive actions and judicial decisions should conspire to promote
that same objective.

In
the present-day political scenario, where various political parties vie for
popular support and compete for the exercise of power, Christianity shows no
preference and endorses no one in particular. But it is emphatic that whichever
party or formation comes to power, it should do nothing to violate human
dignity and welfare. As Christ said to Pilate, “You would have no power over me
if it were not given to you from above”. Christians are therefore exhorted to
exercise their franchise and choose their leaders judiciously. While the clergy
are expected to keep away from the direct exercise of political authority as it
may lead to a conflict of interest with their pastoral function, the laity are
encouraged to enter politics if they are so inclined and use it for the service
of the people rather than for self-aggrandisement. By so doing, they will be
the “salt of the earth” and the “leaven in the dough”.

Christians
in
India
today face a piquant situation with the rise of Hindu majority fundamentalism
which seeks to subjugate the minorities and establish an openly Hindu Raj.
The Hindutva parties and formations are
pushing an agenda that does not jell with the secular ethos of the Indian
Constitution and is out of sync with the motto of “Liberty, Equality and
Fraternity”. Christians find it hard to support such parties as their track
record is not reassuring and their aggressive posturing offensive and
intimidating. They will be constrained to support other more tolerant and
inclusive parties and vote with them against the saffron brigade. They will
have to shed their inhibitions about political participation as aloofness and
passivity is not an option. If the fanaticism of the Hindutvavadis is not
checked, sections of the minority communities, including the Christians, may be
tempted to turn to agitational ways, and even militancy. That will be
unfortunate but inevitable if the powers-that-be “fiddle while
India burns”.
What happened to the Muslims in
Gujarat and
the Christians in Orissa bodes ill for the future of the country.

Indian Christians should join hands
with right-thinking sections of Indian society across the denominational divide
and the political spectrum to combat Hindutva terrorism before it is too late. The saffron outfits that indulge in
violence should be declared terrorist outfits and subjected to international
sanctions and the full weight of the law. Christians should not hesitate to
lobby with the international community for such action. It is not only the
religious minorities but various subaltern groups such as tribals and scheduled
castes who are at the receiving end of Hindutva bullying tactics. In fact it is
a numerical minority that is organizing itself to overwhelm a scattered majority
of the Indian community. The sooner the latter realize this fact and get their
act together, the better for Indian nationhood.

The
Indian nation-state faces a huge developmental backlog which calls for adept
political management. Unfortunately what we see is political posturing and
gimmickry. Vote-banking and one-upmanship are rampant, while we boast of being
the world’s largest democracy. Our democracy may soon be reduced to a mere
electoral circus every five years with little improvement in the quality of
life of the “aam aadmi”. Political mismanagement has encouraged fundamentalism,
corruption, violence and terrorism. A mere law-and-order approach to these
evils will not do. Governance should be transparent, inclusive, responsive and
effective; that is the challenge of politics. Our human and natural resources
need to be nurtured judiciously. If Christians choose to enter political life
in a big way, their task is cut out for them and they should rise to the
occasion in solidarity with their fellow citizens of all faiths.